Message-ID: <200101241859160970.00081AAE@194.176.49.219>
In-Reply-To: <01FD6EC775C6D4119CDF0090273F74A4021EFD@emwatent02.meters.com.au>
References: <01FD6EC775C6D4119CDF0090273F74A4021EFD AT emwatent02 DOT meters DOT com DOT au>
X-Mailer: Calypso Version 3.20.01.00 (3)
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 18:59:16 +0200
From: "Vidmantas Balciunas" <vibal AT lrtc DOT lt>
To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Subject: RE: DOS and WIN/98
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-SLUIDL: 59114157-2C2346C2-9FE71975-A246D2DC
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: opendos AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

>Hmmm. Performance is always given as a reason to avoid loading
>16 bit drivers, ie. relying on the 32 bit drivers that Windoze uses
>instead.

Try to enable DMA access when using DOS based 16 bit driver
to achieve 20-30 Mb/s disk transfers. It's not possible under plain
DOS, and it isn't possible under Windows using DOS drivers.
But IT IS when using Windows native drivers. No matter 16 bit
or 32 bit.

>Well, firstly I have yet to see ANY 32 bit stuff give much
>better performance than 16 bit stuff - sure, sometimes there's a
>little extra performance, but often it's negligible or even negative.
>Secondly, Windoze often supplants the 16 bit drivers anyway, so
>I don't see any problem with having these loaded, just in case
>they're needed.

>As for M$W-ME ... I wouldn't dream of touching it!!!  <g>

For plain DOS lovers it's definitely not the case, but otherwise
it's fast good OS. Especially for gammers. And it's the last
release of Win9x clone, the last DOS based OS.
Next Windows release will be NT based. So..

Vidas